ROSHANLAL MEGHWAL Vs. RADHA MEGHWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In wake of instant surge in COVID-19 cases and spread of its highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in Court, for the safety of all concerned.

(2.) The petitioner has preferred this revision petition claiming for the following reliefs:-

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was married to respondent no. 1 in the year 1990 and they had one daughter (Tanu) out of the matrimonial relationship in the year 1994. Counsel for the petitioner submits that an agreement of divorce was drafted between the petitioner and his wife on 19/7/2000, which was like a compromise and one time alimony of Rs.50,000.00 was stated to be given under the agreement aforesaid. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the maintenance deposit in FD No. 0094237 of Mewar Anchalik Gramin Bank, Debari Branch, Udaipur was called for by the learned trial court but details were not given by the respondent. Counsel for the petitioner submits that in para-6 of the claim petition, the wife has required Rs.5,000.00 for her and Rs.5,000.00 for her daughter-total Rs.10,000.00 whereas the daughter is now married and, therefore, no more maintenance is required for the daughter. Counsel for the petitioner also submits that in accordance with 125(4) Cr.P.C., the respondent is not entitled to seek any maintenance as she wilfully left her husband's house. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that as per the compromise, the wife's needs were settled, thus, any further reason of demand is contrary to the law. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the appeal preferred by both the parties before learned court below were contrary to the jurisdiction as the appeal did not lie.